The great EV divide: Taxing the poor for little gain?
If you can afford a $50,000 car, do you really need a $7500 tax credit?Watch the movies today and a Toyota Prius always seems to turn up. It's the darling of Hollywood, but how long will this relationship last? This is Hollywood, where relationships are measured in weeks, not years.
Besides, soon Hollywoodies can show their green cred by buying any number of more luxurious plug-in vehicles. And, shoot, the government will give them $7500 for saving the world, for looking even greener than some poor wanna-be in a Prius.
But, are these tax credits really helping to scale EV costs down to mainstream pricing? Are they really making the planet that much greener? Even worse, are these tax credits coming at the expense of poor people?
Finish: The great EV divide - Taxing the poor for little gain?
Labels: lithium battery, plug-in hybrid vehicles, tax credits
posted by Dahcredyns at
10:28 AM
3 Comments:
Full Story
Watch the movies today and a Toyota Prius always seems to turn up. It's the darling of Hollywood, but how long will this relationship last? This is Hollywood, where relationships are measured in weeks, not years.
Besides, soon Hollywoodies can show their green cred by buying any number of more luxurious plug-in vehicles. And, shoot, the government will give them $7500 for saving the world, for looking even greener than some poor wanna-be in a Prius.
But, are these tax credits really helping to scale EV costs down to mainstream pricing? Are they really making the planet that much greener? Even worse, are these tax credits coming at the expense of poor people?
In my previous post, I covered the next gas crunch, due some time in the next 5 years that, according to the likes of Sir Richard Branson, will be even worse than the current recession, particularly for poor and middle class people. Will these EV tax credits help such people at all if gas prices rise in the next 10 years?
According to the experts, plug-in lithium technology will only appeal to about 10 percent of the population by 2030 because commodities prices will limit cost-effectiveness until then. So, the average person won't feel the results of these tax incentives for decades? Only those already with wealth will be advantaged in the interim?
Moreover, considering the massive amount of batteries that plug-ins use, one has to ask if these commodities are even being used wisely. For instance, instead of 1 plug-in electric vehicle, automakers could make about 10 conventional hybrids - 10 plug-in upgradeable hybrids - with the same commodities, while providing the same scaling and R&D opportunities.
Wouldn't that provide more bang for the buck? Wouldn't that finally lead to sub-$20,000 hybrid cars that could help ease the rising price of gasoline for a larger number of people that need such help the most? Moreover, wouldn't that also create the most change now and in the future?
It's not so much about the poor paying taxes to help the rich buy EV's. It is more about "making an impact".
If we want to truly make an impact, we need incentives for regular hybrids to make them affordable to the average consumer. This type of incentive will deliver the type of volume to begin to reduce oil dependency.
This will have significantly more impact on reducing oil dependency than tax incentives for a select few that can afford an EV....
Couldn't agree more, Smurf.
I hate sounding like a plug-in critic because I really do love the cars and I plan on one being my next car.
Still, I want impact and as much of it as possible right now, and too much of the data suggests that conventional hybrids are the way to achieve such impact, yet there seems very little impetus for US automakers to embrace such a path. Somehow that has to change.
Post a Comment
<< Home